THE CASE STUDY

ome economists picked up the notion in the 1990s that we were experiencing a "Goldilocks" economy characterized by high growth, increased employment, and low inflation. It was supposedly driven by the productivity gains of an economy based less on heavy industry and more on service, as well as organizations that were benefitting from new information technologies.

We all know how that worked out. It may have contributed to the thinking behind the "dot-com bubble," which was characterized by a wave of IPOs for organizations built around the information economy, ballooning stock options, and new attitudes toward company value (with profit not required or even frowned upon). Twenty-year-old entrepreneurs became mega-millionaires, but not for long. It turned out that the "new economy" of that time was a house of cards.

It's a good time to ask the question again. Policies of the Federal Reserve in concert with those of the recent administration produced results (prior to the pandemic) that challenge traditional economic theory centered on the so-called Phillips curve. It's a simple economic model named after the economist who explored the positive relationship between low unemployment and higher wage rates. It was a short step to correlate, without proving causality, higher wage rates and inflation, and therefore low unemployment and inflation.ome economists picked up the notion in the 1990s that we were experiencing a "Goldilocks" economy characterized by high growth, increased employment, and low inflation. It was supposedly driven by the productivity gains of an economy based less on heavy industry and more on service, as well as organizations that were benefitting from new information technologies.

We all know how that worked out. It may have contributed to the thinking behind the "dot-com bubble," which was characterized by a wave of IPOs for organizations built around the information economy, ballooning stock options, and new attitudes toward company value (with profit not required or even frowned upon). Twenty-year-old entrepreneurs became mega-millionaires, but not for long. It turned out that the "new economy" of that time was a house of cards.

It's a good time to ask the question again. Policies of the Federal Reserve in concert with those of the recent administration produced results (prior to the pandemic) that challenge traditional economic theory centered on the so-called Phillips curve. It's a simple economic model named after the economist who explored the positive relationship between low unemployment and higher wage rates. It was a short step to correlate, without proving causality, higher wage rates and inflation, and therefore low unemployment and inflation.ome economists picked up the notion in the 1990s that we were experiencing a "Goldilocks" economy characterized by high growth, increased employment, and low inflation. It was supposedly driven by the productivity gains of an economy based less on heavy industry and more on service, as well as organizations that were benefitting from new information technologies.

We all know how that worked out. It may have contributed to the thinking behind the "dot-com bubble," which was characterized by a wave of IPOs for organizations built around the information economy, ballooning stock options, and new attitudes toward company value (with profit not required or even frowned upon). Twenty-year-old entrepreneurs became mega-millionaires, but not for long. It turned out that the "new economy" of that time was a house of cards.

It's a good time to ask the question again. Policies of the Federal Reserve in concert with those of the recent administration produced results (prior to the pandemic) that challenge traditional economic theory centered on the so-called Phillips curve. It's a simple economic model named after the economist who explored the positive relationship between low unemployment and higher wage rates. It was a short step to correlate, without proving causality, higher wage rates and inflation, and therefore low unemployment and inflation.

Question 9.

1. Which of the next types of proceeds are entirely contained within in the company's net gross revenue______

2. Regarding the "Customers" account for January, the following information is available: total accounts receivable 250.000 lei, out of which the beginning accounts receivable balance is 50.000. The ending accounts receivable balance is 20.000. Calculate the value of sales to customers and the value of cash receipts from customers in January

3. The bookkeeping of stocks conferring to the enduring record method comprises________

4. The retail price _______ of a product is planned as trails

5. Company A" wants to start manufacturing a new product during the current year in order to expand its product range. It also intends to use a strategy of quality differentiation from its competitors. Which product strategy is it going to adopt?

6. 1. Company A" has decided to launch a new product into a new market. Competition is very intense and the market is attractive. Which marketing strategy should the company adopt in order to launch its product?

7. War between two businesses that offer identical products predestined to meet the same requirements is called:

8. According to the managerial, what is the difference between the managerial economics and economics_______-

9. Which of the following statements about opportunity costs is TRUE?

I. The opportunity cost of a given action is equal to the value foregone of all feasible alternative actions.

II. Opportunity costs only measure direct out of pocket expenditures.

III. To calculate accurately the opportunity cost of an action we need to first identify the next best alternative to that action.

10. . Which of the following statements about opportunity cost is TRUE?

I. Opportunity cost is equal to implicit costs plus explicit costs.

II. Opportunity cost only measures direct monetary costs.

III. Opportunity cost accounts for alternative uses of resources such as time and money.

11. 4. For a rational consumer who has to choose between two goods in the context of budget constraints, the price change of one of the goods, caeteris paribus, will determine:

12. Which of the subsequent topographies define human requirements: